If one goal of Mel Gibson’s controversial The Passion of the Christ was to spark discussion about Jesus’s final days and the events surrounding his death, it was mission accomplished on Wednesday night in downtown Hamilton.
While several moviegoers flipped open their cell phones immediately after walking out of the sold-out early showing at the Hamilton Movie Theater, offering friends an immediate review, more than 15 students and faculty members from 91鶹Ʒ moved their movie critiques several doors down to the Barge Canal Coffee Co.
Movie tickets and refreshments at the coffeehouse were provided through the university’s Beyond 91鶹Ʒ program, which helps fund opportunities for learning experiences outside the classroom.
Some of those at the Barge offered a thumbs up for the film, and some a thumbs down. Ultimately, though, the group had more questions than answers about what they had just seen and what Gibson had accomplished.
“Just what was his intention here?” asked sophomore Allison Smith. Was the movie a historical, literal look at the final 12 hours of Jesus’s life, Gibson’s interpretation and vision of what those days were like, or yet another depiction of the Passion, a stitching together of images from Passion plays that have been performed for hundreds of years?
Finding a definitive answer proved difficult. What was clear to the students and professors was that the movie was exceptionally violent. What was left unclear from the discussion, though, was whether that violence was necessary or appropriate.
“The violence was to make the point about what Jesus suffered through. I think that really has been lost through the generations,” said first-year Lucas Meeker. He differentiated the role of violence in The Passion from something like Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill, which he said depicted violence for violence’s sake, without real merit or a specific cinematic goal.
John Frame, a senior, said he felt that Jesus’s ability to endure such brutal punishment only proved that he was unique, that “no other mortal man could go through that.” He conceded, though, that despite having read and heard about the film’s violence, there was much more of it than he had anticipated.
Others said the violence overshadowed any kind of message of love that Jesus delivered, and the blood and gore detracted from the movie. It was hard to engage with Jesus, said Lesleigh Cushing, assistant professor of philosophy and religion, when he was covered in blood and looking at the world around him through constant “bloodshot eyes.”
News reports said the movie, which opened on Ash Wednesday took in an estimated $15 million to $20 million after just one day of release, was remarkable for a religious-themed movie. It opened in more than 3,000 theaters, an unusually large release for a religious film with English subtitles to translate the Latin and Aramaic its characters speak.
Georgia Frank, associate professor of philosophy and religion, had invited the students from her two Western Traditions courses and her New Testament course to see the movie and discuss it afterward as a group. Steven Kepnes, Murray W. and Mildred K. Finard Professor in Jewish studies, also invited students from his Western Traditions class.
Frank said she started exploring the idea of extending her classroom to downtown Hamilton after seeing Gibson’s face splashed across the cover of Newsweek. She was intrigued by what kind of story Gibson would tell, and she said her students are looking at some of the texts that Gibson said he drew on for his film. She felt that how Gibson interpreted those texts was worth exploring.
She said the film disappointed her in the end, and she probably wouldn’t recommend it to others. What she valued most was the discussion at the Barge, saying the conversation with students and other faculty members was “priceless.”
Some critics have said the film has an anti-Semitic slant, a charge Gibson has flatly denied.
The controversy was at the forefront in the mind of Omid Safi, assistant professor of philosophy and religion, who saw the film with the 91鶹Ʒ group. He said he could not prevent himself from keeping a running scorecard in his mind, tallying how many Jews acted badly toward Jesus, as compared to how many Romans.
Others said there seemed to be enough blame to spread around among all of the participants, although there was a feeling that perhaps Pontius Pilate was depicted in too favorable a way.
All, however, could probably agree with sophomore Troy Someno’s description of the film.
“It was intense.”